The article examines the effectiveness of the strategy for restoring the competitiveness of the manufacturing industry in the United States. The main vulnerabilities of the “produce more in America” policy, the course to restore and reformat broken supply chains are considered using the example of key manufacturing industries. It is stated that the policy of rehabilitation of the manufacturing industry pursued by Biden is not a unique phenomenon for the United States. It was adhered to, to a greater or lesser extent, by the Obama and Trump administrations. However, only the Biden administration ordered to put it at the center of the ideology of the American revival. It is noted in this article that structural reforms to transform the industrial sector, implemented with unprecedentedly high financial support from the federal authorities, are directed at creating new jobs, forming new industrial clusters and innovation centers. The main efforts are aimed at targeted manufacturing industries: pharmaceuticals, strategic metals and minerals, electric vehicles, and semiconductors. The use of nationally produced goods, reshoring and the formation of supply chains within the United States are proclaimed as the main preconditions for building a truly strong economy. The concept of “real energy independence” promoted by Biden, relies on renewable energy sources. A new impetus to the “greening” of the energy sector may be given to compensate companies investing in renewable energy sources for the costs associated with the forced replacement of foreign suppliers with national ones. Meanwhile, in effect, the attitude of Washington towards hydrocarbon energy remains fairly loyal, at least at the time of high fuel prices. In the domestic economic agenda, the priorities of industrial policy are being revived, aimed at achieving sole technological leadership. However, Washington’s achievements cannot be interpreted solely as the successes of Biden’s economic policy. An equally significant role was played by the expansion of domestic demand against the background of overcoming the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The vector of further development is determined by the slogan “surpass China and the rest of the world”. The White House is trying to persuade American companies to build new manufacturing facilities in the US in order to compete with Chinese suppliers. However, against the background of China’s obvious desire to develop its own research and production base, the opportunities for American diсtate are narrowing. Import substitution is a slow process – “money speaks louder than economic patriotism”. Only a small portion of the business returns to the country, because of global instability, China is considered by a large part of American investors as a fairly safe haven. Washington’s attempts to squeeze China out of the supply chains have only accelerated the implementation of Beijing’s programs aimed at achieving technological selfsufficiency and “de-Americanization”. In recent years, the epicenter of the policy of technological containment, pursued by the United States against China, has shifted towards Russia. Our country is accused by Washington of deliberately orchestrating disruptions in the supply chains in energy and agricultural commodities markets. The experience of anti-Chinese actions, accumulated in the competitive struggle against companies and state organizations, and coordinated with US allies, is being used now against Russian exporters.